James T. v. Frank Bisignano

James T. · United States District Court for the Southern District of California · August 21, 2025 · No. 22cv0694-SBC

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted plaintiff’s counsel’s motion for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) following a remand in a Social Security disability case and a fully favorable decision on remand. The court approved $40,336.00 in fees, payable from plaintiff’s past-due benefits, and ordered counsel to refund the previously awarded $5,261.00 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees to plaintiff.

Holdings

  1. The requested $40,336.00 fee was reasonable and did not require a downward adjustment because it was within the 25-percent statutory ceiling, counsel provided timely and effective representation, there was no litigation delay, and the fee was not excessive in relation to the benefits obtained.
  2. Counsel must refund the $5,261.00 previously received under the EAJA to Plaintiff because the EAJA and § 406(b) awards compensated the same work.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the contingent-fee agreement and requested $40,336.00 fee were reasonable under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).
  2. Whether counsel was required to refund the previously awarded $5,261.00 EAJA fee to Plaintiff after receiving the § 406(b) fee.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (6)

  • Crawford v. Astrue, 586 F.3d 1142, 1148, 1151-52 (9th Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 796, 802 (2002)(followed)
  • Parrish v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 698 F.3d 1215, 1218 (9th Cir. 2012)(followed)
  • Tamiko T. v. Kijakazi, Case No. 20cv1229-KSC, 2023 WL 253114, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 18, 2023)(followed)
  • Reddick v. Berryhill, Case No. 16-cv-29-BTM-BLM, 2019 WL 2330895, at *2 (S.D. Cal. May 30, 2019)(followed)
  • Roland S. v. Kijakazi, No. 20-cv-1068, 2023 WL 6966153, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 20, 2023)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…